1. Field of the Invention
This invention discloses a novel method for aerial distribution of pollinating agents into a field by either propelling the agent through the air from the field periphery or dropping the agent into the field from above. Aerial distribution of pollinating agents is a particularly effective, efficient, and economic means of achieving uniform pollination of large fields of row crops.
2. Background Art
Plant pollination by the honeybee (Apis mellifera) is by far the most common means of commercial crop pollination in the world. This pollination method depends on a single key element in honeybee natural history, the insect""s social nature that is physically expressed as the beehive. Because the beehive is the essential center of any honeybee""s existence the entire colony of 20,000 to 40,000 bees can be controlled by manipulation of the hive, and the business of a migratory beekeeper is largely based on moving hives about the country to pollinate crops for profit. A single hive typically weights 80 to 120 pounds, occupies about 9 cubic feet, and is filled with a delicate matrix of cells containing food, material, and developing bees essential to the operation and survival of the colony. Hive-based commercial migratory pollination is a place-and-retrieve operation where the honeybee hive is brought to the field for the duration of the bloom, subsequently retrieved from the field, loaded on flatbed trucks, transported to the next bloom locale, and deployed once again to service a new orchard or field. The logistics of the field deployment requires heavy equipment in the form of front loaders to load, unload, and position the hives at convenient access points near the target cultivar. For large field crops like sunflowers, canola, cotton, peanuts, mustard and similar cultivars the hives are distributed in clusters at the edges of the fields. Such large cultivar monocultures range in size from relatively small fields of 40 acres to mile-long sections containing hundreds and even thousands of acres. And in most nations, including the United States and Canada, the trend continues towards larger farms with even larger row crop fields that maximize the inherent efficiencies of mechanization and the growing practice of precision agriculture. This trend has continued despite clear evidence over several decades that shows honeybee hives placed at the periphery of these large-scale monoculture do not adequately pollination much of the field""s interior.
Sunflowers are an example where a less than optimal crop is produced by inadequate pollination agent distribution. Sunflowers originated in the High Plains of North America where native and early cultivar varieties of the sunflower were self-incompatible and required indigenous insect pollination for a viable seed crop. As mechanization made larger fields possible the numbers and distribution of these native pollinating agents became too low to ensure an adequate seed set and crop yields declined. Sunflower hybrids were selectively breed to possess high levels of self-compatibility to overcome this pollination problem by simply not requiring a pollinating agent to produce a seed. And though self-compatible sunflower hybrids usually outproduce self-incompatible varieties in mass plantings, it is also known that many of these modem hybrids will actually produce even better when adequately pollinated by insects. Literature from several recent investigations indicates that in most modem sunflower hybrids, seed set, seed oil percentage, seed yields, and oil yields increased when pollinators (primarily bees) were present Yields increased as much as 48.8 percent and oil percentages increased 6.4 percentage in hybrid crops fully exposed to bee pollination activities (North Dakota State University, 1995). The problem is that the physical dimensions of large fields prevent pollinator penetration much beyond a relatively narrow band along the edges where the honeybee hives are placed. The problem of pollinator placement for sunflowers has been well understood for several decades. In the 1970""s McGregor""s classic work on pollination summarized the many findings to that time by simply stating xe2x80x9cIf there is a shortage of honey bees in the sunflower fields, a small seed crop is harvestedxe2x80x9d (McGregor, pp. 345-351, 1976). McGregor discussed many studies that indicated the benefits of pollination beyond roughly 300 feet from the honeybee hive became difficult to detect if found at all. To prevent the sharp decline in crop yield from inadequate pollination the practice of convergence or saturation pollination was recommended where the hives are to be distributed in a pattern that uniformly disperses the bees throughout the entire field. In the United States the specific distribution pattern advocated in 1962 was for distributing the honeybees every tenth of a mile (528 feet) in each direction in the field so the flight radius would only be some 264 feet. In the hybrid field plantings of today with higher plant densities per acre, larger seed heads, and more uniformity of bloom timing this 40-year old recommendation for a radius flight distance is probably much too high to achieve an actual condition of saturation pollination. In a typical mile-long quarter section (5280xc3x971320 feet, 160 acres) sunflower field with hives uniformly spaced around the edge, over 75 percent of the plants can receive no effective honeybee pollination. Larger fields have correspondingly higher percentages of inadequate pollination; even a relatively small square field of 40 acres can have 50 percent of its area inadequately pollinated. The usual reasons given by the migratory beekeepers why hives can not be uniformly distributed within a field are the significantly greater, if not impossible, time and logistics requirements associated with the placement, maintenance, and retrieval of hives located at hundreds of points in a field. Clustering hives located at a relative few points around the edges is the only practical method of dispersal. Reasons given by the growers for no interior dispersal are equally clear, they do not want hive access alleys cut into their crops. Such inroads exposes the plants to wind damage, aids in weed establishment, entails crop land loss, promotes soil compaction, provides pest access, contributes to soil erosion, and the widely dispersed hives constrain spraying schedules while in general creating both work and inconvenience. The grower simply does not need more things to do, monitor, and worry about. Less than optimal sunflower hybrid crop yields without the aid of a pollination agent are acceptable as long as the costs, problems, and inconveniences of uniformly distributing honeybee hives are greater than the potential benefits.
Similar insufficient pollination conditions exist for other large field crops such as canola, cotton, mustard, peanuts, safflower, soybeans, and tomatoes. In each case these crops are grown in very large monoculture fields that would substantially benefit by a uniform pattern of saturation pollination it could be made practical and economical. And in each case the hive method by virtue of its weight, size, damage sensitivity, heavy equipment logistics, and retrieval requirements has proven inadequate in providing a pollinating service beyond a narrow band some 250 feet from the field""s edge that leaves much of the crop area simply underdeveloped.
No known technology exists for the aerial distribution of pollinating agents into a field by launching them from the field""s periphery or dropping them from above through the air. Obviously the honeybee hive by weight, size, and delicate cell structure is not a candidate for such deployment; the image of a beehive being catapulted through the air may have a precedent in ancient marine warfare but not crop pollination. Dropping a hive even a few feet is sufficient to cause significant interior damage and produce long-term injury to the honeybee colony. No one has achieved aerial distribution of honeybee nests as a viable means of distributing pollinating agents in field crops.
While the concept of successfully distributing pollinating agents by aerial means is novel and new, the literature has examples of methods for the distribution of biological control agents (parasite/predator insects) by various means including aerial. Maedgen (U.S. Pat. No. 4,260,108) first taught the simple xe2x80x9cairborne release and broadcast of loose parasite/predator insect eggs for biological control of insect pests.xe2x80x9d Show U.S. Pat. No. 4,966,329) advanced the art by distributing predatory mites in a carrier material that required the adequate mixing of the materials and subsequent blowing the particulate/mite mixture on to plants. Tedders (U.S. Pat. No. 5,484,504) introduced another form of carrier for predaceous insects in the form of a string with attached eggs that could be cut xe2x80x9cin predetermined lengths to be manually placed on individual plants.xe2x80x9d Most recently, Carter (U.S. Pat. No. 5,996,276) teaches the use of a biodegradable delivery device (a container) for dispersing biocontrol agents into a field by aerial means. The throwing tool is a mechanical device similar to those used in casting clay pigeons for skeet target practice; the delivery device, a hollow clay pigeon. The biological control agents are described as means to biologically control insect pests as an alternative to chemical insecticides, a desirable benefit in the health-conscious marketplace. The preferred embodiment describes an aerodynamic, biodegradable saucer shaped delivery device containing parasitic wasps. A variety of suitable biological control agents are listed for such deployment, xe2x80x9cLygus hesperus, parasitic wasps such as Aphaelinus nr. paramali, lacewing eggs, parasitic or predaceous mites and spiders, nematodes, and viral or bacterial agents.xe2x80x9d None of the above teachings nor any of their incorporated references suggest, whether taken singly or in combination, the deployment of anything other than biological control agents for the control of insect pests in crops.
A second background area, apart from the aerial distribution of rapacious insects, is that of pollinating methods. Harper (U.S. Pat. No. 6,010,390) teaches a novel alternative pollination method to the honeybee hive system and describes a non-aerial delivery system used for pollination distribution in orchards. Distribution is xe2x80x9cby means of an appropriate container conveying said pollinating insects.xe2x80x9d The containers are termed field boards and are described as measuring 20xc3x9725xc3x974 cm, each containing 130 cocoons of solitary bees, and are hand-carried for dispersal into an orchard. Harper neither addresses nor suggests how the problems of large-scale field pollination should or could be handled; the sole distribution method described is for an orchard where xe2x80x9cthe grower can walk the boards to optimum locations regardless of muddy conditions, narrow lanes or mass plantings.xe2x80x9d Harper also recites a number of United States patents that describe the management of various solitary bee species, but none describe nor suggest any aerial distribution means.
The present invention is superior to and an original departure from the current state of the art. First, the invention uniquely provides a viable means for aerial distribution of pollinating agents uniformly throughout large, densely packed fields of row crops not possible to accomplish with the present honeybee hive or solitary field board systems. Second, the invention describes a delivery device means for transporting the pollination agent which is able to withstand the destructive forces associated with being aerially propelled or dropped over significant distances into a field. A critical element making this pollination deployment invention possible was the discovery by experimentation that pollinating insects such as solitary bees are capable of withstanding the significant inertial forces associated with launch acceleration and landing impacts. Third, the invention solves a recognized pollination problem of at least forty years duration that remained unresolved before this teaching. Finally, the invention provides a means for achieving unprecedented levels of increased production on more than 35 million acres of United States and Canadian croplands presently significantly under served by the current practices of the pollination art.
It has been discovered that pollinating agents can be effectively and uniformly distributed by airborne techniques utilizing the present method. By this method the inaccessible interior of large row crop fields and other inaccessible plant areas where inadequate pollination exists can be provided with sufficient pollinators. The ability to distribute pollination agents uniformly throughout such circumstances provides for enhanced crop production, more options of cultivar and crop choice, and a superior return on the investment made to produce a crop.
A primary object of the present invention is to provide a method of deploying pollination agents by aerial means sufficient to provide plant pollination uniformly throughout a field.
Another object of the present invention is to provide a means for distributing pollination agents by propelling the agents from a field periphery or dropping the agents from above into a field by use of delivery devices that bear the agents so they settle in a predetermined pattern.
Another object of the present invention is to provide an engineered delivery device with shapes, sizes, and other characteristic which govern such attributes as launchability, flight control, landing attitude, agent protection, agent release, nesting support, device longevity, plural agent support, multi-device separation, and biological control features.
Another object of the present invention is to provide ecologically sound pest control by combining both pollination and biological control agents in one deployable delivery device.
Yet another object of the present invention is to significantly enhance crop production and crop variety choice through saturation pollination technology applied to such diverse cultivars as beans, canola, cotton, mustard, peanuts, safflower, soybeans, sunflowers and tomatoes.
A final objective of the present invention is to provide a technology whereby restoration of native pollinators in remote wildernesses, fragmented habitats, and similarly impacted natural areas is feasible so the natural food chain damaged due to extinct or diminished numbers of indigenous pollinators becomes once again a viable infrastructure capable of rebuilding and sustaining a robust ecosystem.
The term xe2x80x9cliving organismsxe2x80x9d as used herein refers to any animal, typically of Arthropods, incorporating the class Insecta, and including but not limited to the orders of Anoplura, Coleoptera, Dermaptera, Diptera, Embioptera, Hemiptera, Hymenoptera, Lepidoptera, Neuroptera, Orthoptera and Thysanoptera; all of which include species and subspecies that pollinate plants by their activities. Specifically included in this term are new species and subspecies identifiable by accepted taxonomic classifications as may be discovered or created that prove to be effective pollinators.
The term xe2x80x9cpollinating agentxe2x80x9d as used herein refers to any living organism that by its actions can pollinate at least one plant such as an entomophilous plant. Representative examples of such agents are the Insecta species collectively described as solitary bees; two specific examples of solitary bees are Megachile pugnata and Osmia lignaria. 
The term xe2x80x9cfieldxe2x80x9d as used herein refers to any designated vegetated area containing at least one plant target of a pollination agent. Typically the term is used herein to define an area of cleared enclosed land used for at least one of any type of cultivar capable of benefiting from pollination; also, as used herein, this term includes uncultivated areas of flora in which plant pollination is enhanced by introduction of a pollination agent. The term specifically includes the situation where the delivery device bearing the pollination agents lodgings in plant foliage above the ground as being fully within the concept of landing on the ground in the field.
The term xe2x80x9cdelivery devicexe2x80x9d as used herein refers to any container capable of holding, protecting, and releasing pollinating agents among plant capable of being pollinated. Typically, the term used herein describes a container having a shape, size, and other characteristic that governs such attributes as launchability, flight control, landing attitude, agent protection, agent release, nesting support, device longevity, plural agent support, multi-device separation, and biological control features. The term encompasses a delivery device engineered to be capable of withstanding the mechanical stresses on the device during launch, flight, and landing while providing protection to the living organisms within it. Equally encompassed is a relatively simple container having only the fundamental capabilities to hold, protect, and dispense without any attention to aerodynamic design features or stress conditions beyond normal handling.
The present invention can best be understood by several examples that illustrate how a delivery device bearing a pollinating agent is dispersed through the air. Each is a preferred embodiment of a typical element of the method for aerial distribution of pollinating agents. Each of these non-limiting examples illustrates a possible embodiment and various refinements.